Note : Les descriptions sont présentées dans la langue officielle dans laquelle elles ont été soumises.
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-1-
METHOD FOR DETERMINING GELATION TIME IN A CORE
PLUG
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application claims priority to U.S. Application Serial No.
15/994,272 filed
on May 31, 2018, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by
reference.
TECHNICAL FIELD
[0002] The present disclosure relates to determining gelation time of a
core plug of a
geologic formation, usually reservoir rock, taken during or after drilling a
well.
BACKGROUND
[0003] Economic and efficient oil and gas production is dependent on
understanding
key properties of reservoir rock and fluid, such as porosity, permeability,
compressibility,
wettability, formation flow potential, fracture orientation, and fluid
compatibility.
Geoscientists have developed a variety of approaches, including log and core
analysis
techniques, to measure these properties. Core analysis is especially important
in geologic
formations with vertical and lateral heterogeneity. Core analysis can include
evaluation of
rock properties and anisotropy; organic matter content, maturity, and type;
fluid content;
fluid sensitivity; and geomechanical properties. This information can be used
to calibrate
log and seismic measurements and to help in well and completion design, well
placement,
and other aspects of reservoir production.
SUMMARY
[0004] Conventional methods for determining gelation time cannot give an
accurate
measurement of gelation time in situ. For example, the conventional bottle
test for gelation
time is often conducted at ambient pressure, and is more prone to evaporation
during
testing. In order to determine in situ gelation time, large core plugs are
needed and
specialized coreholding setups, which must be used, are not commercially-
available.
Conventional coreholding setups cannot be used due to the large size of the
core plugs.
Therefore, a need exists for a method for accurately determining gelation time
in a core
plug at in situ conditions utilizing commercially-available coreholders.
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-2-
[0005] In accordance with one embodiment of the present disclosure, a
method of
determining gelation time is disclosed. The method includes placing a
composite core plug
into a core holder of a vessel. The vessel may be a commercially-available
coreholder, and
each core plug is cylindrical. The composite core plug includes a first core
plug with
second and third core plugs disposed on opposite sides of the first core plug.
Specifically,
the second and third core plugs may each couple to each respective end of the
first core
plug. The flat surfaces of the first core plug and the second core plug may be
coupled
together on one end of the first core plug, and the flat surfaces of the first
core plug and
the second core plug may be coupled together on the opposite end of the first
core plug.
The second and third core plugs are saturated with polymer solution, and the
first core
plug is saturated with gel solution comprising polymer and crosslinker. The
method
further includes alternating polymer solution injections between a first
injection area
located on the second core plug and a second injection area located on the
third core plug,
while ensuring that the polymer solution is being continuously fed to the
composite core
plug. Lastly, the method includes monitoring the pressure drop, or pressure
profile change,
across the composite core plug during the alternating injection of polymer
solution to
determine the gelation time of the gel solution in the first core plug. A
commercially-
available coreholder may be used for this method as the composite core plug is
a size that
may be tested using a commercially-available coreholder.
[0006] Additional features and advantages of the described embodiments will
be set
forth in the detailed description which follows. The additional features and
advantages of
the described embodiments will be, in part, readily apparent to those skilled
in the art from
that description or recognized by practicing the described embodiments,
including the
detailed description which follows as well as the drawings and the claims.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS
[0007] The following detailed description of specific embodiments of the
present
disclosure can be best understood when read in conjunction with the following
drawings,
where like structure is indicated with like reference numerals and in which:
[0008] FIG. 1 illustrates three core plugs connected into one composite
core plug,
according to one or more embodiments described in this disclosure; and
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-3-
[0009] FIG. 2 graphically depicts the relationship between differential
pressure (y-
axis) and time (x-axis) during gelation time testing, according to one or more
embodiments described in this disclosure.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0010] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "composite core plug"
refers to a
combined core plug including the first, second, and third core plugs.
[0011] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "coreflooding" refers to a
test in
which a fluid or combination of fluids is injected into a core plug.
Objectives include
measurement of permeability, relative permeability, saturation change,
formation damage
caused by the fluid injection, or interactions between the fluid and the rock,
such as the
gelation time of the fluid. The core material often comes from an oil
reservoir, but some
tests use outcrop rock. The fluid in place at the start of the test is
typically either a
simulated formation brine, oil, or a combination of brine and oil. Injected
fluids may
include crude oil, simulated reservoir brine, refined fluids, drilling mud
filtrate, acids,
foams, gel solutions, or other chemicals used in the oil field. Pressures and
flow rates at
both ends of the core are measured.
[0012] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "coreflooding coreholder"
refers to a
coreholder vessel equipped to conduct coreflooding experiments and
measurements,
including coreflooding gelation time testing.
[0013] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "coreholder" refers to a
vessel
designed to withstand elevated temperatures and pressures, such as up to
20,000 pounds
per square inch (psi) (137,895 kilopascals (kPa); 1 psi = 6.89476 kPa) and 300
C, and to
test core plugs at these elevated temperatures and pressures.
[0014] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "core plug" refers to a
plug, or
sample, taken from a whole core from a formation for analysis. Core plugs are
conventionally 1 to 1.5 in. (2.5 to 3.8 centimeters (cm); 1 in. = 2.54 cm) in
diameter and 1
to 2 inches (in.) (5 cm) long. Core plugs are conventionally cut perpendicular
to the axis of
the core or parallel to the axis, which form horizontal and vertical plugs,
respectively,
when cut from a vertical wellbore. Conventional core plug analysis is
conducted in a
coreholder.
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-4-
[0015] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "formation" refers to a
body of rock
that is sufficiently distinctive and continuous from the surrounding rock
bodies that the
body of rock can be mapped as a distinct entity. A formation is, therefore,
sufficiently
homogenous to form a single identifiable unit containing similar rheological
properties
throughout the formation, including, but not limited to, porosity and
permeability. A
formation is the fundamental unit of lithostratigraphy.
[0016] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "pore volume" refers to
the ratio of a
porous material's air volume to a porous material's total volume.
[0017] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "reservoir" refers to a
subsurface
formation having sufficient porosity and permeability to store and transmit
fluids.
[0018] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "saturated" refers to the
almost
complete filling (such as 0.6 pore volume (PV), 0.8 PV, 0.9 PV, 0.95 PV, or
0.99 PV or
above) of the core sample pore volume with a given fluid.
[0019] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "viscous fingering" refers
to a
phenomena whereby the interface of two fluids, in which one fluid has a lesser
viscosity
than the other, such as a difference of more than 5 centiPoise (cP), 10 cP, 20
cP, or 50 cP,
and bypasses sections of the porous media as it moves along, creating an
uneven, or
fingered, profile. Fingering is a relatively common condition when injecting
solutions with
a viscosity of less than 10 cP into porous media.
[0020] As used throughout this disclosure, the term "whole core" refers to a
complete
section of a conventionally-drilled core. The section may be up to
approximately 2 feet
((60 cm); 1 foot = 30.48 cm) in length, with conventional core diameters lying
between
1.75 and 5.25 in. (4.4 and 13.3 cm).
[0021] The present disclosure is directed to methods for determining gelation
time in core
plugs at in situ conditions. Gelation time is the time when a gel solution
starts to form gel.
It is an important parameter for screening gel formulations, characterizing
gel formulation
performance, and designing gel treatments. The method includes placing a
composite core
plug into a core holder of a vessel. The vessel may be a commercially-
available
coreholder, and each core plug is cylindrical. The composite core plug
includes a first core
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-5-
plug with second and third core plugs disposed on opposite sides of the first
core plug.
Specifically, the second and third core plugs may each couple to each
respective end of the
first core plug. The flat surfaces of the first core plug and the second core
plug may be
coupled together on one end of the first core plug, and the flat surfaces of
the first core
plug and the second core plug may be coupled together on the opposite end of
the first
core plug. The second and third core plugs are saturated with polymer
solution, and the
first core plug is saturated with gel solution comprising polymer and
crosslinker. The
method further includes alternating polymer solution injections between a
first injection
area located on the second core plug and a second injection area located on
the third core
plug, while ensuring that the polymer solution is being continuously fed to
the composite
core plug. The injection area may include a point on, a part of, or the
entirety of the
exposed end, face, or surface of the second or third core plug. The polymer
solution may
be injected in an injection point or may be injected along the entire exposed
face of the
second or third core plug. Lastly, the method includes monitoring the pressure
drop, or
pressure profile change, across the composite core plug during the alternating
injection of
polymer solution to determine the gelation time of the gel solution in the
first core plug.
The gelation time is determined through monitoring the pressure response while
the gel
solution resides in the first core plug. In-situ gelation times can be
determined using
normal length core or core composite, with conventional coreholders, and
without the
need for multiple pressure taps.
[0022] Referring now to FIG. 1, an example composite core plug 100 is
illustrated. The
first core plug 110 is composite with the second core plug 120 and the third
core plug 130
to form the composite core plug 100. The diameter, porosity, and permeability
of the
second core plug 120 may be within 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 2%, or 5% of a diameter,
porosity,
and permeability of the third core plug 130. The second core plug 120 and the
third core
plug 130 may be cut from the same whole core. The first core plug 110 may be
saturated
with the gel solution and the second core plug 120 and the third core plug 130
may be
saturated with the polymer solution prior to combining the three core plugs to
form the
composite core plug 100.
[0023] To determine gelation time in the core plugs at in situ conditions, the
method may
be conducted at in situ confining pressure and temperature. Confining
pressure, or
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-6-
geostatic pressure, is the pressure of the weight of overburden, or overlying
rock, on a
formation. The confining pressure and temperature will vary depending on the
depth, type
of formation, and reservoir conditions meant to be simulated. The confining
pressure may
be from 200 to 3000 psi (1378.95 to 20684.27 kPa), from 300 to 2500 psi
(2068.43 to
17236.89 kPa), from 500 to 2000 psi (3447.38 to 13789.51 kPa), or from 800 to
1500 psi
(5515.81 to 10342.14 kPa). The temperature may be from 50 to 150 C, from 80 to
125 C,
from 90 to 115 C, or from 95 to 110 C. The method may further be conducted
with a
specific backpressure. Backpressure is the pressure opposed to the desired
flow of liquids
registered on testing equipment. The backpressure may be from 25 to 450 psi
(172.36 to
3102.64 kPa), from 50 to 350 psi (344.738 to 2413.17 kPa), from 80 to 300 psi
(551.58 to
2068.43 kPa), or from 100 to 250 psi (689.476 to 1723.69 kPa).
[0024] The polymer solution is used, rather than a solution with a viscosity
of less than 50
cP, less than 20 cP, less than 15 cP, less than 10 cP, less than 8 cP, less
than 5 cP, or less
than 2 cP, to saturate the second and third core plugs to minimize the
dilution of the
polymer concentration in the gel solution due to mixing. A solution with a
viscosity of less
than 50 cP, less than 20 cP, less than 15 cP, less than 10 cP, less than 8 cP,
less than 5 cP,
or less than 2 cP may be an aqueous solution. The polymer solution may have a
viscosity
of greater than 50 cP, greater than 20 cP, greater than 15 cP, greater than 10
cP, greater
than 8 cP, greater than 5 cP, or greater than 2 cP. Additionally, saturating
the second and
third core plugs with polymer solution, instead of a solution with a viscosity
of less than
cP, minimizes viscous fingering and dispersion of the polymer solution into
the gel
solution during subsequent injection, due to the similar viscosities of the
polymer solution
and the gel solution. The polymer solution is used as the injection fluid for
the same
rationale due to the similar viscosities of the polymer solution and the gel
solution. The
polymer solution may have a viscosity within 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 20%, or 50% of a
viscosity of the gel solution before gelation. The polymer solution is
injected into the
composite core plug where pressures are monitored to observe gelation time
with
conventional coreholders, and without the need for pressure taps. The
pressures are
monitored downstream of the injection areas, or upstream of the injection
areas, or at a
location proximate to the injection areas.
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-7-
[0025] Various polymer solution components are contemplated and may include
polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol, polyacrylic acid, polyacrylonitrile,
acrylamide
copolymers, biopolymers, polysaccharides, or xanthan gum, for example.
Biopolymers are
polymeric biomolecules, or polymers produced by living organisms. The three
main
classes of biopolymers are polynucleotides, polypeptides, and polysaccharides.
Polysaccharides are often linear bonded polymeric carbohydrate structures.
Xanthan gum
is a polysacchararide that may be used as a thickening agent and stabilizer.
Other possible
polysacchararides include, but are not limited to, schizophyllan and
scleroglucan. The
polymer solution may include total dissolved solids of from 35,000 to 80,000
milligrams
per liter (mg/L) (35,000 to 80,000 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3); 1
mg/L=1kg/m3),
from 15,000 to 120,000 mg/L (15,000 to 120,000 kg/m3), or from 5,000 to
200,000 mg/L
(5,000 to 200,000 kg/m3). The polymer solution may include a weight averaged
molecular
weight of from 10 million to 30 million Daltons, 15 million to 25 million
Daltons, or 15
million to 20 million Daltons. The polymer solution may have a hydrolysis
degree of from
20% to 40%, of from 25% to 35%, or of 30%.
[0026] As previously discussed in this disclosure, the gel solution includes
polymer and
crosslinker, whereas the polymer solution includes polymer without
crosslinker. The
crosslinker may be at least one of hexamethylenetetramine, resorcinol,
chromium acetate,
chromium malonate, and polyethyleneimine. The gel solution may include the
same
polymer used in the polymer solution. In some embodiments, the gel solution
includes at
least one of polymer, hexamethylenetetramine, and resorcinol.
[0027] The method may further include saturating the first, second, and third
core plugs
with an aqueous solution prior to saturating the first core plug with the gel
solution and the
second and third core plugs with polymer solution. Saturating the first core
plug with the
gel solution and the second and third core plugs with polymer solution
displaces the
aqueous solution in the core plugs.
[0028] In some embodiments, the aqueous solution may include one or more than
one of
fresh water, salt water, brine, connate brine, municipal water, formation
water, produced
water, well water, filtered water, distilled water, and sea water. In some
embodiments, the
aqueous solution may include water or a solution containing water and one or
more
inorganic compounds dissolved in the water or otherwise completely miscible
with the
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-8-
water. In some embodiments, the aqueous solution may contain brine, including
natural
and synthetic brine. Brine includes water and a salt that may include calcium
chloride,
calcium bromide, sodium chloride, sodium bromide, other salts, and
combinations of
these. The aqueous solution may include total dissolved solids of from 150,000
to 300,000
mg/L (150 to 300 kg/m3).
[0029] Referring again to FIG. 1, as previously discussed in this disclosure,
the method
further includes alternating polymer solution injections between a first
injection area 122
located on the second core plug 120 and a second injection area 132 located on
the third
core plug 130, while ensuring that the polymer solution is being continuously
fed to the
composite core plug 100. The polymer solution may be injected in an injection
point or
may be injected along the entire exposed face, or surface, of the second or
third core plug.
Each alternating polymer solution injection may include injecting up to 0.5
PV, up to 0.4
PV, up to 0.25 PV, up to 0.2 PV, up to 0.15 PV, up to 0.1 PV, up to 0.08 PV,
or up to 0.05
PV of the first core plug per injection. The volume of each alternating
polymer solution
injection, alternatively, may be governed by the second and third core plugs
pore-volumes
such that dilution and production of the gelant mixture is eliminated or at
least minimized.
Specifically, to ensure the fluid in the middle core is not produced, the
maximum
permissible pore volume to be injected may be the pore volume of the opposing
end plug.
For example, the pore volume injected into the second core plug may be
governed by the
pore volume of the third core plug, and vice versa. Without being limited by
theory, this
pore volume may be approximately equivalent to 0.5 PV of the first core plug.
To avoid
fluid breakthrough, such as fluid production from the first core plug, no more
than 0.5 PV,
0.4 PV, 0.3 PV, 0.25 PV, 0.2 PV, 0.15 PV, 0.1 PV, 0.08 PV, or 0.05 PV of the
first core
plug may be injected. This value may alternatively be expressed as no more
than 1 PV, 0.8
PV, 0.6 PV, 0.5 PV, 0.4 PV, 0.3 PV, 0.2 PV, 0.16 PV, or 0.1 PV of the second
or third
core plug.
[0030] In another embodiment, each alternating polymer solution injection may
include
injecting equal amounts of polymer solution in each injection. It is
contemplated that
alternating polymer solution injections further includes injecting the polymer
solution at a
constant flow rate, which may be from 0.05 to 0.2 milliliter per minute
(ml/min) (0.00083
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-9-
to 0.0033 cubic centimeters per second (cc/s); 1 ml/min = 0.0167 cc/s), from
0.8 to 0.15
ml/min (0.0013 to 0.0025 cc/s), or 0.1 ml/min (0.00167 cc/s).
[0031] Alternating the polymer solution injections while ensuring the polymer
solution is
being continuously fed to the composite core plug allows for continuous, but
alternating,
flow of the gel solution within the composite core plug. Alternating the
polymer solution
injection area ensures that the gel solution remains within the first core
plug of the
composite core plug, so that the measured gelation time is an accurate
gelation time for the
gel solution in the porous media of the first core plug. By continuously
injecting the
polymer solution, the testing method more accurately simulates in situ gel
solution
injection conditions. When a gel solution is injected downhole into a
formation, the gel
solution is being continuously pumped into the formation, meaning that the gel
solution is
in a state of constant flow. Therefore, continuously injecting the polymer
solution into the
composite core plug more accurately simulates in situ gel formation, resulting
in a more
accurate measurement of gelation time.
[0032] Injecting the polymer solution, as opposed to a solution with a
viscosity of less
than 10 cP, reduces the viscous fingering phenomena in the composite core plug
because
the polymer solution and the gel solution have similar viscosities. When the
viscosity of a
displacing fluid is lesser than that of displaced fluid, the displacing fluid
will exhibit less
resistance and a tendency to advance faster. This contrast in viscosity yields
viscous
fingering, where instabilities arise in the form of the less viscous
displacing fluid fingering
through the more viscous displaced fluid. Therefore, if a solution with a
viscosity less than
cP is injected, it will finger through the polymer solution and have a
tendency of
breaking into the gel solution in the first core plug and diluting the gel
solution, which will
yield an inaccurate gelation time. It is not viable to inject the gel solution
because gel
would form at the injection areas, or outside the core plug, and block the
inlet and outlet
injection tubing of the coreflooding coreholder. Using the polymer solution as
the
injection solution prevents gel from forming at the injection areas and yields
a more
uniform displacement which prevents viscous fingering and yields a more
accurate
gelation time.
[0033] Constant flow in a porous medium provides mixing and agitation to the
gel
solution. Agitating the gel solution, which includes the polymer and
crosslinker, triggers
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-10-
crosslinking of the polymer chains, which causes the onset of gelation. The
continuous
flow of this method better replicates the in situ condition of pumping the gel
solution into
a formation by simulating constant flow, therefore more accurately measuring
the gelation
time and generating more representative data.
EXAMPLE
[0034] The following example illustrates features of the present disclosure
but is not
intended to limit the scope of the disclosure.
Example 1
[0035] Three core plugs from a carbonate reservoir were used for a gelation
time test. The
detailed properties of these three core plugs are presented in Table 1. The
three-plug
composite core plug is built as shown in FIG. 1, with first core plug 110 in
the middle and
second core plug 120 and third core plug 130 on either side of the first core
plug 110. The
second core plug 120 and the third core plug 130 were cut from the same core
plug.
Table 1: Core plug properties.
Core plug Length, cm Diameter, cm
Porosity, % Permeability, md
First Core Plug 4.329 3.772 23.7 706
Second Core Plug 2.009 3.780 25.6 551
Third Core Plug 1.758 3.780 25.6 551
[0036] A synthetic connate brine, with total dissolved solids (TDS) of 229,870
mg/L, was
prepared for saturating core plug samples. A synthetic sea water with 57,670
mg/L TDS
was used to prepare polymer solutions. Detailed brine compositions are
presented in Table
2.
Table 2: Synthetic brine and water compositions.
Nat, Ca2+, Mg2+, Cl, Hc03-, s04-, TDS,
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
Connate 140,58 229,87
66,052 19,008 2,239 384 1,620
brine 0 0
Sea water 18,300 650 2,110 32,200 120 4,290 57,670
[0037] An organically crosslinked polymer gel solution including 4,000 mg/L
polymer,
1200 mg/L hexamethylenetetramine (HMTA), and 400 mg/L resorcinol, was used for
the
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-11-
test. The polymer used for the test was a polyacrylamide (FlopaamTm 3630S,
produced by
SNF Floerger) with a molecular weight of 20 million Dalton and 30% hydrolysis
degree.
The polymer solution including 4,000 mg/L polyacrylamide was prepared in
synthetic sea
water.
[0038] The clean and dry core plugs were first fully saturated with the
synthetic connate
brine under vacuum. Each plug was then individually loaded into a coreholder,
and around
2.0 PV of the gel solution was injected into the first core plug 110 at room
temperature,
saturating the first core plug 110. Around 2.0 PV of the polymer solution was
injected into
the second core plug 120 and the third core plug 130 at room temperature,
saturating the
second core plug 120 and the third core plug 130. Following that, the
composite core plug
100 was then built as shown in FIG. 1, with the gel saturated first core plug
110 between
the second core plug 120 and the third core plug 130. The composite core plug
100 was
then loaded into a coreflooding coreholder. A confining pressure of 1400 psi
and a
backpressure of 200 psi were then applied, the coreflooding coreholder system
was heated
to 95 C before conducting the coreflooding gelation time test.
[0039] The coreflooding gelation time test was conducted by injecting the
polymer
solution at a constant flow rate of 0.1 ml/min. The injection was alternately
injected from
the first injection area 122 and the second injection area 132, and each
injection amount
was around 0.1 PV of the first core plug 110. The same amount of polymer
solution was
injected each alternation. The small injection amount maintains the gel
solution flowing in
the first core plug 110, and the same injection amount from both directions
maintains the
gel solution in the first core plug 110 after each injection cycle. An
injection cycle is the
completion of two total injections, one injection at the first injection area,
and one
injection at the second injection area.
[0040] The test was conducted and differential pressure response was recorded
as a
function of time. The recorded differential pressure as a function of time is
presented in
FIG. 2. Not intending to be bound by theory, it is believed that gelation time
is determined
as the time point at which the slope of the pressure differential changes from
a first slope
to a second slope, where the first slope is less than the second slope. This
increase in flow
resistance is due to the formation of gel. The first slope 210 represents a
slow increase in
differential pressure and the second slope 220 represents a rapid increase in
differential
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-12-
pressure. The second slope 220 begins to form at approximately 74 hours, and
therefore
the gelation time is determined to be 74 hours. This measurement is a more
accurate
measurement of in situ gelation time than the 72 hour gelation time observed
in a bottle
test run for the same gel solution at 95 C. Bottle tests are often used to
rapidly determine
gelation time by periodically observing the flowability of the gel solution in
the bottle. The
flowability of the gel solution is observed by slightly tilting and inverting
the bottle. In
bottle testing, the gelation time is determined as the time point when an
elastic tongue-
shaped gelant partially flows out with a tongue of several centimeters long,
when the
bottle is uncapped and inverted. As such, this example method is more accurate
than the
bottle testing method because the example method was conducted at in situ
simulated
formation pressure and temperature, whereas the bottle testing method was only
conducted
at in situ simulated formation temperature. Without in situ simulated
formation pressure,
the bottle testing method was more prone to evaporation. In addition, the
bottle test and
any analogous bulk test does not mimic an in situ gelation process that would
occur as the
gel solution flows in a formation, not only due to non-representative
pressures, but also
due to a lack of continuous flow within the formation.
[0041] For the purposes of describing and defining the present method, it is
noted that
reference in this application to a characteristic of the subject matter of the
present
disclosure being a "function of' a parameter, variable, or other
characteristic is not
intended to denote that the characteristic is exclusively a function of the
listed parameter,
variable, or characteristic. Rather, reference in this application to a
characteristic that is a
"function" of a listed parameter, variable, etcetera, is intended to be open
ended such that
the characteristic may be a function of a single parameter, variable,
etcetera, or a plurality
of parameters, variables, etcetera.
[0042] It is also noted that recitations in this application of "at least one"
component,
element, etcetera, should not be used to create an inference that the
alternative use of the
articles "a" or "an" should be limited to a single component, element,
etcetera.
[0043] For the purposes of describing and defining the present method it is
noted that the
term "approximately" is utilized in this application to represent the inherent
degree of
uncertainty that may be attributed to any quantitative comparison, value,
measurement, or
other representation. The term "approximately" is also utilized in this
application to
CA 03100654 2020-11-17
WO 2019/231479 PCT/US2018/041359
-13-
represent the degree by which a quantitative representation may vary from a
stated
reference without resulting in a change in the basic function of the subject
matter at issue.
[0044] Having described the subject matter of the present disclosure in detail
and by
reference to specific embodiments, it is noted that the various details
disclosed in this
application should not be taken to imply that these details relate to elements
that are
essential components of the various embodiments described in this application,
even in
cases where a particular element is illustrated in each of the drawings that
accompany the
present description. Further, it will be apparent that modifications and
variations are
possible without departing from the scope of the present disclosure,
including, but not
limited to, embodiments defined in the appended claims. More specifically,
although some
aspects of the present disclosure are identified in this application as
preferred or
particularly advantageous, it is contemplated that the present disclosure is
not necessarily
limited to these aspects.
